Narrative:

I was in the tower cab but not working a position. The winds began to increase and the local controller determined a runway change was needed to runway 12. Coordination was accomplished with the approach controller and along with the runway change; an opposite direction practice approach to runway 30R was approved. Aircraft X was continuing inbound on base for runway 12L and turned final; as aircraft Y joined the final to runway 30R. There was a controller change in progress as aircraft X turned final and aircraft Y was joining the final outside the marker. The new controller took the position as aircraft Y checked on frequency. Local control told aircraft Y to continue; and that he would call his turn to circle. I reminded local control that he needed to call traffic and instruct aircraft Y where to turn ('continue' does not deconflict opposite direction operations in the event of a go-around and doesn't comply with our orders). Though communication appeared difficult at times with the pilot of aircraft Y; he circled as instructed and landed without incident. After the event; I realized that this kind of opposite direction operation (both aircraft getting radar services) did not involve anyone needing priority and if I understand correctly; should not have been approved. Simply waiting a couple minutes until the first arrival (aircraft X) landed; and then approving an 'opposite flow' approach to runway 30R for aircraft Y; would have avoided the opposite direction operation (odo) situation and mitigated a lot of the associated risks. In the future; good communication and planning from the tower side in this kind of situation may assist the approach controller in positioning the opposite flow aircraft to start its practice approach as soon as opposing traffic is no longer a factor. There continues to be misunderstandings and a disconnect between facilities and controllers within our facility about what the requirements are for opposite direction and opposite flow operations. Many controllers have expressed frustration trying to understand the latest procedures; and one controller even mentioned they were not briefed on the latest requirements (scheduling issues or leave may have made a briefing difficult to accomplish).in terms of understanding odo requirements; a challenge seems to be that the procedures have changed so many times that it is hard for controllers to keep straight the latest restrictions. And while it's important to brief everyone on new procedures; retaining the information from a briefing can be challenging for situations that we not always practice regularly (eg. Odo). Retention of new information such as this might be enhanced by having safety discussions regularly which should include reviewing events (such as the one above) and doing interactive tabletop exercises to practice techniques and methods for resolving similar traffic scenarios in the future. One of the key elements that helps me keep odo straight in my mind is understanding the distinction of odo versus opposite flow. The bottom line I've concluded is there better be a darn good reason (emergency/priority) I'm telling an approach controller that odo for two aircraft receiving radar services is approved. However; if a pilot is requesting practice approaches or doesn't need priority; it's important for us to understand that we don't have to deny them service (workload permitting); but opposite flow approaches can be coordinated such that an odo situation doesn't arise (no opposing traffic on the final or departing). I've seen controllers here provide outstanding; commendable service to pilots multiple times by working in an opposite flow operation when traffic permits. My advice to controllers is that if you're too busy on position to mentally go over the odo requirements and how to comply with them; then opposite direction and opposite flow operations should not be approved at that time. Controllers often have egos and/or want to provide the best service to our pilots; but when in doubt; we must err to the side of caution to mitigate safety risks and prevent further odo-related incidents in the future.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BJC Tower Controller observed another Controller not complying with opposite direction operation procedures.

Narrative: I was in the tower cab but not working a position. The winds began to increase and the Local Controller determined a runway change was needed to Runway 12. Coordination was accomplished with the Approach Controller and along with the runway change; an opposite direction practice approach to Runway 30R was approved. Aircraft X was continuing inbound on base for Runway 12L and turned final; as Aircraft Y joined the final to Runway 30R. There was a controller change in progress as Aircraft X turned final and Aircraft Y was joining the final outside the marker. The new controller took the position as Aircraft Y checked on frequency. Local Control told Aircraft Y to continue; and that he would call his turn to circle. I reminded Local Control that he needed to call traffic and instruct Aircraft Y where to turn ('continue' does not deconflict opposite direction operations in the event of a go-around and doesn't comply with our orders). Though communication appeared difficult at times with the pilot of Aircraft Y; he circled as instructed and landed without incident. After the event; I realized that this kind of Opposite Direction Operation (both aircraft getting radar services) did not involve anyone needing priority and if I understand correctly; should not have been approved. Simply waiting a couple minutes until the first arrival (Aircraft X) landed; and then approving an 'Opposite Flow' approach to Runway 30R for Aircraft Y; would have avoided the Opposite direction Operation (ODO) situation and mitigated a lot of the associated risks. In the future; good communication and planning from the tower side in this kind of situation may assist the approach controller in positioning the opposite flow aircraft to start its practice approach as soon as opposing traffic is no longer a factor. There continues to be misunderstandings and a disconnect between facilities and controllers within our facility about what the requirements are for opposite direction and opposite flow operations. Many controllers have expressed frustration trying to understand the latest procedures; and one controller even mentioned they were not briefed on the latest requirements (scheduling issues or leave may have made a briefing difficult to accomplish).In terms of understanding ODO requirements; a challenge seems to be that the procedures have changed so many times that it is hard for controllers to keep straight the latest restrictions. And while it's important to brief everyone on new procedures; retaining the information from a briefing can be challenging for situations that we not always practice regularly (eg. ODO). Retention of new information such as this might be enhanced by having safety discussions regularly which should include reviewing events (such as the one above) and doing interactive tabletop exercises to practice techniques and methods for resolving similar traffic scenarios in the future. One of the key elements that helps me keep ODO straight in my mind is understanding the distinction of ODO versus opposite FLOW. The bottom line I've concluded is there better be a darn good reason (emergency/priority) I'm telling an approach controller that ODO for two aircraft receiving radar services is approved. However; if a pilot is requesting practice approaches or doesn't need priority; it's important for us to understand that we don't have to deny them service (workload permitting); but opposite FLOW approaches can be coordinated such that an ODO situation doesn't arise (no opposing traffic on the final or departing). I've seen controllers here provide outstanding; commendable service to pilots multiple times by working in an opposite flow operation when traffic permits. My advice to controllers is that if you're too busy on position to mentally go over the ODO requirements and how to comply with them; then opposite direction and opposite flow operations should not be approved at that time. Controllers often have egos and/or want to provide the best service to our pilots; but when in doubt; we must err to the side of caution to mitigate safety risks and prevent further ODO-related incidents in the future.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.